The answer is 'Yes'. I have a template that I have used for Wales UK scenarios which could easily be adapted. As for N.Ireland, in my view, this is not so 'necessary' due to the natural stand alone nature of the province in the UK scenarios.
If there is anyone with a particular knowleadge of Welsh politics who would like to collaborate by doing the issues for any of the incomplete scenarios sitting on my PC, please get in touch;
They are 1915 [not a miss-type], 1923, 1929, 1945, 1950, 1955, 1970, 1979.

The October 1974 General Election in Scotland
The scenario includes the new feature 'Enhanced Crusader Targetting Strategy'
This scenario is complete except for the Issues. If anyone fancies tackling the issues, please feel free to do so and upload back to this thread.
Download here ....
Scotland - 1974 October.rar 1.3 MB
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=2OQI30VW

When I said that 'at the start of the 1987 general election campaign, the Alliance were shown in most polls to be level with the other two parties in a fairly even three-way vote split.' I should have pointed out that it had been traditional for the support of the third party to rise during a General election campaign by about 6%, which could easily have resulted in an Alliance majority. However, 1987 bucked the trend and the Alliance support fell away.

It means you are screwed.
It is a common error message that could be attributed to any number of things.
Assuming that no errors are identified via the scenario checker, the most likely place for errors is in the ridings file.
Some things are not picked up by the scenario checker, such as an out of date region name being used as a leader's home region.

I have often wondered about Crusaders;
What defines where they go?
What determines how powerful they are?
What determines when they get tired?
Why are they called Crusaders?
Dealing with the latter point first, it is not a description that relates to politics in the UK. It is only used as a term to describe those warriors in the middle ages who went to kill Muslims in the name of Christianity. It is a term that some modern day Muslims regard as offensive.
Sometimes when i play a scenario I get to release a Crusader into the game only to discover that the Crusaders power is 0/0/0, and doesn't increase. I understand that the initial power of a Crusader is directly linked to the power of your party leader. If your leader doesn't have a high Leadership ranking then your Crusaders powers tend to start very weak. I also think that the initial Crusader power might be linked to the party eastablishment ranking.
The quite interesting thing that I have discovered about Crusaders is what determins where they go. Once a Crusader has been released into the game, we are told where the Crusader is going with an explanation in brackets of(Using Targetting Strategy). I have often noted that this targetting strategy doesn't seem to be my targetting strategy as the Crusader seems as likely to go to support one of my candidates with 5% in the polls as one of my candidates with 35% where I have decided to use targetting points.
It seems that the only regions where a Crusader won't go are those regions where I am not running any candidates. This is assuming that the regions_candidates_running file is correct. I have carried out tests and can confirm that a '0' in any region will ensure the Crusader doesn't go there.
If you stop thinking about the regions_candidates_running file as being a record of where parties are running candidates and treat it as the parties Crusader Targetting Strategy File, you can create or amend any scenario to give a far more logical approach to targetting and in effect, make the Crusaders more influential. All you need to do is change the '1's to '0's in those regions where a party does not have any interesting seats to fight. To take things to one extreme, if you changed the regions_candidates_running file to have one party only fielding candidates in one region then all the Crusaders you create will stay in that region rather than moving all over the place. Clearly making such changes assist those parties that are fighting on a narrow front.
I have trialed this approach and can confirm that changing regions in the regions_candidates_running file to '0' does not seem to affect any other campaigning you want to do in those regions; you can still run Ads and barnstorm in these regions with your leader.
Aside from changing the regions_candidates_running as I have suggested, clearly Crusaders are going to be more influential in scenarios with fewer regions to start with.
I have not yet worked out why and when a Crusaders power drops.

Election Night
In PM4E, the timing of the declaration of the results is determined by the time details that appear for each region in the region variable file under the section
// time polling occurs, EST
// 2400 clock
When I create a scenario and set the time for a particular region to declare as 0106, at the end of the game, that result comes out at "5:06 AM EST"
(oddly, when the result is queing, it is listed as to be declared at 5:06 PM EST)
Is it possible for me to correct this feature so that the time declared comes out as 0106?
Is it possible to change the time from EST to GMT for instance?
If so, how do I do it?
If not, can the ability to do this become a future feature?
Sometimes, when I have set the declaration times, I find that for some reason, on election night, a gap of about 12 hours appears between results.
Are there a set of guidelines that you could post to help me work through these problems?

I have an unfinished UK 1922 scenario sitting on my PC that I didn't think that I had uploaded to here. Please can you clarify if this is the scenario I sent to you or if it isn't, can you reveal where you found it as I would like to try it?

By the start of the 1983 General Election campaign, the Alliance had fallen back from its 1981 poll peak, and the 1983 election never looked like giving anything other than a clear Tory majority.
At the start of the 1987 general election campaign, the Alliance were shown in most polls to be level with the other two parties in a fairly even three-way vote split.
I'm into Alternate election scenarios though not particularly a 1992 one.
Lawrence: I assume that your starting point is a 1992 scenario that someone else has created. You can play around with the electoral trends file to try and get a realistic starting point but I always found this cumbersome. If I was doing an alternate 1992 along the lines you were suggesting, I would painstakingly go into the ridings file and input the starting vote for each party in each riding. And before you ask, no I wouldn't like to do this for you. Good luck.